Appraising Employees at the San Diego Zoo Essay
Appraising Employees at the San Diego Zoo
1. What skills does Black think employees need to work successfully in the area of HR? The skills that Black thinks employees need to work successfully in HR is for them to be commercial, challenging, and focused on delivery and excellence. They must also understand change and transformation, excel at operations, and balance tactical and strategic thinking and acting. They will have to be able to manage and navigate organizational complexity and ambiguities and not be afraid to say no in order to establish boundaries with the business.
2. What are some of the outcomes of the company’s new HR strategy? I think the outcomes of the company’s new HR strategy has been great. Early on there were some employees that were unsure about the charges, especially the long-time employees that were used to the old ways. Now it seems everyone sees how it has helped the company and everyone is happy and enjoys working for Lloyds. Another outcome is that the company is being recognized outside the firm. Lloyds was in the Sunday Times top 100 Best Companies to work for in the UK. It was also UK’s top 40 Business Brands by an independent researcher.
3. What do you think might be some of the challenges of establishing HR policies for global company? I think there are many challenges when establishing HR polices for a global company. Some of the challenges is the different geographies, culture, employment laws, employee compensation and benefits, taxes and business practices.Creating a global mind-set within the HR group, creating practices that will be consistently applied in different locations/offices while also maintaining the various local cultures and practices, and communicating a consistent corporate culture across the entire organization.
4. What types of situations do you think might require an HR manager to say “no”?I think the HR manager should say no, when the employees are requesting things that go against the company policies. CASE STUDY 2 1 .Evaluate the conduct of Peter Lewiston against the EEOC’s definition of sexual harassment. Peter’s actions definitely shows sexual harassment when compared to the definition of the EEOC. The second form of sexual harassment is what caused a hostile environment for Beverly and is classified as unwelcomed sexual conduct which has an effect of interfering with job performance or creating an intimidating, hostile, or offensive working environment. Peter made it his business himself to enter her environment by spending extra time in her classroom with her and her students which were unwelcome advances. Peter also begged again and again asking Beverly out on lunch dates, which she continuously denied. Peter also spoke (e.g. verbal) on Beverly appearance and the feelings he had for her as well as giving flowers, cards and notes, all of them were unwelcome and was told to Peter by Beverly. Peter harassed her in a physical form too, stalking her and staring when she walked to her car, also attempting to touch Beverly. All of Mr. Lewiston’s actions created an extreme hostile environment for Beverly Gilbury. 2. Should the intent or motive behind Lewistons conduct be considered when deciding sexual harassment activities?
Explain.Peter actions should surely be taken into consideration. If an employee was to touch another employee, it could mean a signal for saying hello or congratulations, or see you later it might not mean anything.However, if employee that was touched had emotional feelings for the employee the touchers touch can be percieved as trying to fondle. If the touched is okay with this, there is no problem, but if toucher was asked repeatedly to stop, there could be reason for a sexual harassment suit. 3. If you were the districts EEOC officer, what would you conclude? What disciplinary action, if any, would you take? If I held the position of EEOC officer, I would evaluate the evidence such as, letters, statements, and legal documents and would recommend that the enployee accused, Mr. Lewiston would, be terminated for creating a hostile work environment for the victim in this case.